Defending Crisis Pregnancy Centers

You may remember the federal lawsuit we filed this spring challenging a blatantly discriminatory law in New York City - targeting crisis pregnancy centers. 

The New York City ordinance requires crisis pregnancy centers to post signs in the lobbies of their counseling centers, add extensive additional written language to their advertising materials, and to provide oral statements during both "in person" and telephonic conversations regarding the services offered by crisis pregnancy centers.

The ACLJ lawsuit, posted here, contends that the ordinance violates the constitutionally protected rights to freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and association, freedom of the press, and due process of law, guaranteed to Plaintiffs by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, as well as the New York Constitution.

As our case continues to move forward, we're backing a lower court decision striking down as unconstitutional a law passed by Baltimore, a law similar to the one in New York City.

Today, we filed an amicus brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.  We argue the Baltimore law is not only unconstitutional, but was part of an organized plan by pro-abortion organizations to target crisis pregnancy centers across the country.

The brief contends:  "The Ordinance is part of a nationwide campaign waged by pro-abortion groups, particularly NARAL Pro-Choice America and its affiliates and legislative allies, to target, marginalize, and distort the message of CPCs, organizations that do not provide or refer for abortion or contraceptives due to their sincerely held religious or moral beliefs."  The brief is posted here.

While the Baltimore statute was the first of its kind in the nation, it has become clear that there's a concerted effort on behalf of pro-abortion organizations to systematically target and punish crisis pregnancy centers in cities across the nation.

In our lawsuit challenging the New York City law, we're requesting that the court issue a preliminary injunction in the case, blocking enactment of the law.  A hearing on that request is scheduled for June 15th.